Police Recruit Standards

Now, before I start I don't want to offend anyone. I have nothing against thick people and will defend with my life your right to be as stupid as you like.

Let me also say that I am not the cleverest person that ever walked the earth. If I were I would find better things to do with my time than to referee minor squabbles!

However, having said that, has anyone noticed the standard of police recruitment can be very (How shall I put it?) variable?

I will give you a recent example;

Now, I can use this example only because the person involved is no longer in the police, he thought better of it. And before you ask, no he wasn't pushed.

I am a tutor constable (For my sins) and this often leads to me having to sort out other officers problems as well as my own.

Now when a new recruit joins the police they go through rigorous testing in mental, physical and medical areas. These tests are in place to weed out those not suitable for the job. The mental tests may cover basic communication skills, reading writing etc.

After they join, they undertake approximately six months of training before being allowed out to patrol on their own, within this six months will be a few weeks patrolling with a tutor constable i.e. me ;-)

Now, one such officer was under my supervision, and needed to claim some expenses he had incurred on an earlier training course.

However, his problem was that he had not claimed the amount within the 3 month time period (Bureaucracy warning!) that he was allowed.

"No problem" says I "Just attach a form 824c (2nd Bureaucracy warning!) with a full explanation i.e. you didn't know you only had three months, they will consider it a special case and you should get the dosh"

"OK" says he, "But will you help me fill in my 824c?"

Of Course I will, and so off I go, in fine flow, with the full English language at my disposal dictating the officers plea. Words trip off my tongue in the style of Wordsworth and Chaucer, I am a literary genius at work. The officer is shocked and amazed at my command of the language, he waits with 'bated breath as each syllable is released from my mouth and floats majestically towards his eagerly awaiting lug holes.

Me "OK so you need to put, I didn't claim the expenses within the three months, cos I was not told to"

See, good aren't I?

Me "Ok got that? Now read it back to me"

Reply "I didn't claim the expenses within the three months, cos I was told not to"

Me "Erm, It's good but it's not right" (My tutor training coming in here, praise them before you tell them they are crap!) "The first thing anyone will ask you is "Who told you not to?" Obviously you were 'not told' not 'told not' "

Reply "It's the same difference"

Me "Err, no it's not actually, they mean two completely different things"

Well, I will say that I probably then spent about an hour and a half teaching the difference between 'not told' and 'told not' but in all honesty I don't think he had grasped it by the end. He eventually told me it was too early in the morning for English language lessons and we had to agree that I was right, eventually the form got filled in correctly.

It's not rocket science, but a basic standard in English is required and how this guy got through without that I will never know. And we are not talking about a young school leaver here either, this was a man in his late thirties.

Ah, well it's good to know that in the main the standard of recruit is good, however if you have that one bad one in charge of your complaint of crime, what does it make you think?


© Bob Slot 2007